• From: Lauren Wood <lauren@s...>
• To: "'XML Developers' List'" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 09:46:51 -0800

Bill la Forge wrote:
> 
> From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@e...>
> >CDATA sections *are* different from normal text, even if only
> >because the author used them.
> 
> Again, is anyone aware of why CDATA is preserved by the DOM?
> What was the reasoning behind this decision? 

Gavin summed it up quite well - the author used a CDATA Section and
may have attached some semantic meaning to it (I know that several
people disagree that CDATA sections can have semantic meaning;
others think they can) so the DOM doesn't throw away that
distinction, just in case.

Lauren

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Re: SAX2 RFD: LexicalHandler draft v.1.1
    • From: "Bill la Forge" <b.laforge@j...>

• Prev by Date: RE: SAX2 RFD: LexicalHandler draft v.1.1
• Next by Date: Re: DOM CDATA vs Normalization
• Previous by thread: Re: SAX2 RFD: LexicalHandler draft v.1.1
• Next by thread: Re: SAX2 RFD: LexicalHandler draft v.1.1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread